Jump to content

Dave1990

Members+
  • Content Count

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

97 "There's no crying in baseball"

About Dave1990

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

1,402 profile views
  1. SI is now interested on the disinterested player, the one that downloads tactics without meaning, the one that doesn't worry about the problems because doesn''t notice them. That is their market, no longer the fans of the old CM or PC Calcio, are the "new" that advances, that is idiots who want to win scudetto immediately in the first year with Benevento by reloading 200 games per season. Reason for which the old fans recently criticize the game every year, while the positive opinions come especially from new fans who have not known the old managerial games.
  2. I agree with you, since 2011 my ranking is this: 1) FM12 2) FM13 3) FM11 4) FM14 5) FM16 6) FM15 7) FM17 8) FM18
  3. Yes it's true, I wanted to highlight the problem of double pressing individual which obviously doesn't solve your problem. Regarding your problem, unfortunately lowering the closing down in that role is impossible, you have to change the role and use a role that performs similar functions with less closing down. In these years I have always used the anchor man (more defensive and less devoted to playmaking tasks) or a DLP/D with "tackle harder" and "close down less". In fact I never understood why a DM/D should have the default instruction "close down more" while the DM/S can be high
  4. Regarding this, if you want you could change CM's default closing down by lowering the team's closing down and the mentality, there will be two types of closing down at the same time. It's a bug known by the developers but in two years they never took the trouble to solve it, it was more important to change (worsening) the game screens.
  5. Allow me to spell one thing to your great post. The problem of tactics overpowered with three strikers already exists from FM14, but until the March patch of FM15 the strikers set up to support were back to defend (even too much), and that's why any striker now doesn't provide any defensive support. If until March 2015, however, there was a logical explanation of why the tactics with 3 strikers worked well, now there is no longer any logical explanation of why these tactics continue to work well.
  6. After reporting several bugs last year (the one on the corners with a man often alone on the second far post, the one on closing down in the individual instructions and in defensive midfielder role for example) and having seen that this reports are beautifully ignored despite the wording "info provided", I think it is useless to waste time reporting the game problems.
  7. In fact, as you said it should simply be about the types of crosses, if the crosses increases only because you insert the indication "whipped crosses" means that there is a problem.
  8. I still think that in a tactic clearly built not to exploit the crosses (inverted full backs, there are no wingers) 46 goals directly from a cross are definitely too many, is equivalent to more than a goal in three. Also because if I wanted to build a tactic that deliberately exploit crosses, I easily get an abnormal number.
  9. I'm convinced that you are right, the problem is when SI ignores repeated reports. Last year I reported a bug on individual closing down, which can be set doubly in the role of DM/de for example, beyond the fact that you can select individual closing down not selectable only changing the tactic team shape. This shouldn't exist in a tactical simulator done well, but unfortunately exists for 3 years and those who wasted time reporting the problem (me and others) was ignored. As well as markings on set-pieces, where instead of seeing a lost mark during the action we often see the player that
  10. I'm not sure that whoscored doesn't consider the crosses coming from a corner, having not found something that confirm or deny this. The data listed were taken from this article, which is based on OPTA data: http://www.sportmediaset.mediaset.it/calcio/seriea/serie-a-2016-2017-tutti-i-numeri-e-le-statistiche_1155412-201702a.shtml These days I noticed this article about Candreva, where it is stated that the Inter's player is the one has attempted the highest number of crosses in Serie A, 165 to be exact, which become 11 per game. And Candreva almost entirely bases his game on crosses,
  11. Both things in my opinion are anomalous, how is unusual the number of goals against in situations of indirect free kicks, too many and almost all come from a random scrum. From data that I consulted, I noticed that in Serie A 2016/2017 season the team that scored more cross-action goals was Torino with 20 goals, 28% of the total goals. While the team in the top five European leagues that crossed more in a normal action was Inter with 940 crosses, far fewer than what we get in the game, and it's a team that in reality abuses of crosses with Candreva that he's a player who has more crosses
  12. That precise situation on FM12 was much more realistic, but it seems we only notice it! : D
  13. Surely, but here I dont' mean: "crosses are bad, I don't want them." Here I try to say that crosses are too much, whether you try to exploit them, or whether you not try to abuse them. As I said before, ME hasn't changed for three years to this part and SI has only tried to "control" the result (i.e. the goals from crosses) rather than the cause (too many crosses). Reason for which you can largely abuse it by simply setting full-backs to attack (completely ignoring that attacking full-backs don't just have to cross but move around to free space, provide support, and if they find no teammates i
  14. Another season, this time I choose West Ham and I decide to buy nobody. I conclude in seventh position in Premier League, I lose the Carabao Cup final against Watford on extra time while I win the FA Cup against Manchester United. But this doesn't interest us, we are interested in how this tactic behaved, deliberately built not to exploit the flanks and not to operate a cross bombardment: And the goals data are these: GOALS FOR From crosses: 35 goals 34,3% From corner (direct and indirect): 14 goals 13,7% From free kick (direct and indirect): 5 go
×
×
  • Create New...